Kobe, Japan (CNN) — There is a reason more than half the world’s population lives in cities, with the number expected to grow. Cities have a lot to offer. Residents can walk to nearby shops and enjoy cultural attractions not available to those in more rural areas. Also, living in a city may make your commute to work much shorter.

Unfortunately, according to health officials from the World Health Organization, that convenience may come with a price — higher levels of stress and a measurable impact on your brain.

Gotta love the ending non sequitir:

So, a key for urban city planners is to maintain and enhance natural green settings as much as possible, and for individuals to take brief respites to enjoy them.

I agree. I commute from the city to the suburbs (because many people moving to the city, like myself, don’t have kids, and therefore schools are downsizing or terribly bureaucratic and tend to only hire insiders) and it drives me nuts. In the context of this article, I consider both cities though. A suburban city is nonetheless a city, especially I believe in the context of this article.

The city is exceptionally noisy, and the city center exceptionally crowded. I dream of the days I lived in solitude in national parks. Now, I’m packed into a dense neighborhood, and my noisy neighbors, particularly those upstairs who wear high heels on hardwood, drive me nuts.

sprawl said:

Not everyone that lives in the suburbs have to commute far.

I agree. That’s precisely why I moved to a suburb last year before moving to a different city. I lived half a mile from work and a few blocks from a grocery store. I drive more living in the city than I did living in the burbs.

Dan said:

Frank, its not a non-sequitur at all. Itâ€™s called â€œattention restorationâ€œ. Thatâ€™s one of the benefits of nearby nature. Both italicized phrases are demonstrable benefits of green infra.

And the attention restoration is temporary for one must soon return to a built environment and all its stressors. I’m with you on the benefits of nearby nature, but cities (and suburbs) are incompatible with the type of nature needed to maintain a healthy lifestyle in the context of the study posted. There is generally too much pollution (mainly noise) and too many crowds in city parks to be of real help.

Frank put his finger on a huge issue. That dog-gone free market reacts to reality — even without government subsidies. Suburbs are no longer feeding into the city center. Instead suburbs are job centers themselves. Wow, that blows all those planner computer models, but since they don’t believe in revealed preferences, they will continue to advocate for transit to downtown for decades.

When the planners finally create new computer models that incorporate jobs in the suburbs while overtly declaring they ignore revealed preferences, then that evil free market might well have already adjusted, decades ahead of the planners.

Iâ€™m with you on the benefits of nearby nature, but cities (and suburbs) are incompatible with the type of nature needed to maintain a healthy lifestyle in the context of the study posted. There is generally too much pollution (mainly noise) and too many crowds in city parks to be of real help.

Physiologically, the findings of ART at this time are that one tree in leaf is sufficient to restore attention.

Wow, that blows all those planner computer models, but since they donâ€™t believe in revealed preferences, they will continue to advocate for transit to downtown for decades.